[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue., 2 Oct. 2018, 4:05 pm Chris Jerdonek, wrote: > > In general, I think it's better to be more open about long-term strategies > within an organization and who is working on what and toward what goals, > etc. That way people can make better decisions about what to work on and > how to spend

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 8:46 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Wed., 26 Sep. 2018, 2:40 pm Chris Jerdonek, > wrote: > >> My advice to you (and which I've been following myself) would be for >> you to break changes into small, tightly-focused PR's, and to have >> only one outstanding at a time (or

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

Thanks Chris, these are excellent suggestions. Can you provide a reference to a PR you’re working or have worked on so we can jumpstart the process on our end? Dan Ryan // pipenv maintainer gh: @techalchemy > On Sep 25, 2018, at 5:47 PM, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:46

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:30 PM, Dan Ryan wrote: > Thanks Chris, these are excellent suggestions. Can you provide a reference to > a PR you’re working or have worked on so we can jumpstart the process on our > end? Hi Dan, The PR's I've been submitting and working on aren't *primarily* of

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 22:09, Dan Ryan wrote: > To Chris’ broader point it is definitely duplicated effort and I am in full > agreement which is why I want to establish which code should be extracted and > generalized and where it should be maintained. But as Paul mentioned there > also is no

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 6:46 AM, Dan Ryan wrote: > As far as the pipenv roadmap, we are rewriting a good chunk of it but it > essentially the atomic things we do or would like to do with regards to > shared functionality at a high level: > > - parse user input/requirements > - retrieve package

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

FYI pipenv have been vendoring pip since pretty early in the projects existence, since before 10 was released. At no point was I in touch to say that was a major issue though because we use the api precisely as you describe, *at our own risk*. Every time I’ve been in touch it’s been to ask how

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 12:53, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > We are using pip internals for things pip wasn’t implemented for. > > Specifically, > > Pipenv uses pip’s package-fetching functions to implement its > > platform-agnostic > >

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 3:47 AM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > We are using pip internals for things pip wasn’t implemented for. > Specifically, > Pipenv uses pip’s package-fetching functions to implement its > platform-agnostic > resolver. pip does not have this, so there’s no functional overlap

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

We are using pip internals for things pip wasn’t implemented for. Specifically, Pipenv uses pip’s package-fetching functions to implement its platform-agnostic resolver. pip does not have this, so there’s no functional overlap here. Those utilities are used to build something that doesn’t exist in

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 10:46, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:25 AM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > Pipenv wraps pip usages inside a virtual environment, so pip is always > > available via “pipenv run pip”, > > so in a sense Pipenv “supports” everything pip does. But as far as

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 3:21 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 19:48, Chris Jerdonek wrote: >> What I'm trying to gauge is, if the plan is for pipenv not to depend >> on pip, and pipenv has strictly greater functionality than pip, then >> what purpose will PyPA have in continuing

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 19:48, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > What I'm trying to gauge is, if the plan is for pipenv not to depend > on pip, and pipenv has strictly greater functionality than pip, then > what purpose will PyPA have in continuing to develop pip in addition > to pipenv? That's not the

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:25 AM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > Pipenv wraps pip usages inside a virtual environment, so pip is always > available via “pipenv run pip”, > so in a sense Pipenv “supports” everything pip does. But as far as things > Pipenv actually has wrapper > commands for, it only tries

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

Pipenv wraps pip usages inside a virtual environment, so pip is always available via “pipenv run pip”, so in a sense Pipenv “supports” everything pip does. But as far as things Pipenv actually has wrapper commands for, it only tries to be pip’s functional superset in “install” and “uninstall”;

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 5:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > If I'm misunderstanding the relationship between pip and pipenv, or > between pipenv and pipfile, I'm happy to be corrected. But can I > suggest that the best way to do so would be to amend the project pages > that are giving me the impressions

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 23:10, Donald Stufft wrote: > So I should probably be explicit that this was basically an idea I had, that > Kenneth rolled with and originally tried to implement as a PR to pip but when > pip’s code base was too, gnarly to get it in directly, he made pipenv to wrap >

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

Pipenv also uses pip as mentioned several times in the thread, and (reiterating here) the entire point of the conversation is about how both can work together on changes. That is the thrust of the whole discussion. We are actively using pip via its internals and pips developers (who _actively

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 12:42, Donald Stufft wrote: > > > >> On Sep 20, 2018, at 2:29 PM, Bert JW Regeer > > wrote: >> >> pip not seeing any improvements is something I think will be sad. I don't >> use pipenv, but use poetry which uses pip behind the scenes to do

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 21, 2018, at 8:14 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 11:41, Nick Coghlan > wrote: >> >> On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 05:47, Donald Stufft wrote: >>> On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote: >>> I don't think anyone's even spoken to the pip

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

Bert, it sounds like you have a Code of Conduct complaint about a PyPA- maintained project -- may I formally pass that along to all of the pipenv maintainers perhttp://www.pypa.io/en/latest/code-of-conduct/ for followup and ask for more specific details? You can let me know on- list or offlist.--

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 11:41, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 05:47, Donald Stufft wrote: > > On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > > I don't think anyone's even spoken to the pip maintainers (yet?) about > > supporting the pipfile format > > > > That comes from me, I

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 05:47, Donald Stufft wrote: > On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > I don't think anyone's even spoken to the pip maintainers (yet?) about > supporting the pipfile format > > That comes from me, I initially wrote the Pipfile as a proof of concept / > sketch of

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

chemy <https://github.com/techalchemy> // e: d...@danryan.co From: Bert JW Regeer [mailto:xiste...@0x58.com] Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2018 9:34 PM To: Dan Ryan Cc: Tzu-ping Chung; Chris Jerdonek; Distutils; Donald Stufft Subject: Re: [Distutils] Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wh

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 16:30, Dan Ryan wrote: > > Pipenv also uses pip as mentioned several times in the thread, and > (reiterating here) the entire point of the conversation is about how both can > work together on changes. That is the thrust of the whole discussion. We are > actively using

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 3:35 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > > I don't think anyone's even spoken to the pip maintainers (yet?) about > supporting the pipfile format That comes from me, I initially wrote the Pipfile as a proof of concept / sketch of an API for replacing the requirements.txt format,

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 19:52, Michael Merickel wrote: > > I think it's far-fetched to start thinking pip is legacy. Pipfile has had a > goal from day 1 to be a format that pip would support. PEP 582 is a path > forward here for providing a default location for a virtualenv [2] - it's > just

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

I think it's far-fetched to start thinking pip is legacy. Pipfile has had a goal from day 1 to be a format that pip would support. PEP 582 is a path forward here for providing a default location for a virtualenv [2] - it's just that everything moves slower in pip because it supports more use-cases

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 2:29 PM, Bert JW Regeer wrote: > > pip not seeing any improvements is something I think will be sad. I don't use > pipenv, but use poetry which uses pip behind the scenes to do installation. I > also use flit. For either of those cases I would think it sad that pipenv

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 12:11, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > > On 21 Sep 2018, at 02:01, Bert JW Regeer > wrote: > >> >> >>> On Sep 19, 2018, at 23:22, Chris Jerdonek >> > wrote: >>> >>> Thus, it's looking like things could be on track

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 23:22, Chris Jerdonek wrote: > > Thus, it's looking like things could be on track to split the user and > maintainer base in two, with pip bearing the legacy burden and perhaps not > seeing the improvements. Are we okay with that future? This'll be a sad day. pip is

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On 21 Sep 2018, at 02:01, Bert JW Regeer wrote: > > > >> On Sep 19, 2018, at 23:22, Chris Jerdonek wrote: >> >> Thus, it's looking like things could be on track to split the user and >> maintainer base in two, with pip bearing the legacy burden and perhaps not >> seeing the

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

: [Distutils] Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package) On Sep 20, 2018, at 8:12 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: Depending on how vital a particular bit of functionality is to pip, we’re likely going to want most libraries that are pulling functionality out of pip to live under

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 20, 2018, at 8:12 AM, Donald Stufft wrote: > > Depending on how vital a particular bit of functionality is to pip, we’re > likely going to want most libraries that are pulling functionality out of pip > to live under the PyPA banner, and ideally should be setup in a way that >

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 11:54 PM, Dan Ryan wrote: > > Since you mentioned following along, here's what we're working on right now: > > https://github.com/sarugaku/requirementslib > -- abstraction layer for parsing > and converting various

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Thu, 20 Sep 2018 at 08:01, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > I’m afraid the new implementation will still need to deal with compatibility > issues. > Users expect Pipenv to work exactly as pip, and get very angry if it does not, > especially when they see it is under the PyPA organisation on GitHub.

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

Thanks for the advices, they are really helpful. Incidentally (or maybe not? I wonder if there is an underlying pattern here) the two areas I do want to work on first are a) how to find a package, and b) how to choose an artifact for a given package. I think I’m starting with the package

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

a shell detection >> library >> made up of some tooling we built in pipenv for environment detection >> https://github.com/sarugaku/pythonfinder >> <https://github.com/sarugaku/pythonfinder> -- this is a library for finding >> python (pep 514 compliant) by

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> Dan Ryan > gh: @techalchemy // e: d...@danryan.co <mailto:d...@danryan.co> > > From: Donald Stufft [mailto:don...@stufft.io <mailto:don...@stufft.io>] > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 1:52 PM > To: Tzu-ping Chung > Cc: Distutils > Subject: [Distutils]

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

ithub.com/sarugaku/virtenv -- python api for virtualenv creation >> >> Happy to provide access or take advice as needed on any of those. Thanks >> all for the receptiveness and collaboration >> >> Dan Ryan >> gh: @techalchemy // e: d...@danryan.co >> >>

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

those. Thanks > all for the receptiveness and collaboration > > Dan Ryan > gh: @techalchemy // e: d...@danryan.co > > From: Donald Stufft [mailto:don...@stufft.io] > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 1:52 PM > To: Tzu-ping Chung > Cc: Distutils > Subject: [Dis

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

io] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 1:52 PM To: Tzu-ping Chung Cc: Distutils Subject: [Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package) My general recommendation if you want a Python implementation/interface for something pip does, is: - Open an issue on the pip r

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 11:41 Paul Moore wrote: > On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 18:52, Donald Stufft wrote: > > > > On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > > > I feel the plan is quite solid. This however leaves us (who want a > Python implementation and interface to do what pip does)

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 18:52, Donald Stufft wrote: > > On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > I feel the plan is quite solid. This however leaves us (who want a Python > implementation and interface to do what pip does) in an interesting place. So > I can tell there are a

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > I feel the plan is quite solid. This however leaves us (who want a Python > implementation and interface to do what pip does) in an interesting place. > So I can tell there are a couple of principles: > > 1. Do not use pip internals > 2.

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > I feel the plan is quite solid. This however leaves us (who want a Python > implementation and interface to do what pip does) in an interesting place. So > I can tell there are a couple of principles: > > 1. Do not use pip internals >

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

I feel the plan is quite solid. This however leaves us (who want a Python implementation and interface to do what pip does) in an interesting place. So I can tell there are a couple of principles: 1. Do not use pip internals 2. pip won’t be using either distlib or setuptools, so they might not

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

> On Sep 19, 2018, at 5:17 AM, Paul Moore wrote: > >> >> >> What is the current situation regarding distlib vs packaging and various >> pieces in pip? Many parts of distlib seems to have duplicates in either >> packaging or pip/setuptools internals. I understand this is a historical >>

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 11:34, Tzu-ping Chung wrote: > > I have the same experience with Pipenv as Nick’s. I would also guess > another reason is the lack of knowledge—this is certainly my own before > I get involved in Pipenv. There is barely any guide on how I should > implement such a thing,

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

I have the same experience with Pipenv as Nick’s. I would also guess another reason is the lack of knowledge—this is certainly my own before I get involved in Pipenv. There is barely any guide on how I should implement such a thing, and my developer’s instinct would tell me to look at a known

[Distutils] Re: Distlib vs Packaging (Was: disable building wheel for a package)

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018 at 10:54, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Given that, and assuming Vinay is amenable to the idea, it would be > nice to revisit the concept of the two layer architecture, with > packaging as the lower level minimalist strictly standards compliant > layer, and distlib as the higher level